Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
I'll take a stab at this one....
Actually, I agree with you....BUT...In response to paragraph:
2) You DO NOT go around and put plastic protectors in every outlet of every other home, who doesn't have kids who have access to outlets and pokey
things. Some parents choose to isolate the child from the dangers, rather than leave them in proximity, with an easily defeatable barrier, between
but if you're going to have someone babysit for you, you do want them in those homes do you not? The baby lives in our house, we ensure our house is
safe. We live in our country, we ensure our country is safe.
3) This one, I actually like. But baby gates won't foil the insane and the criminals. Think about 8 feet taller, times 2...with razor wire...And a
few armed guards for good measure.
4) Again, not a bad idea. Temporary restrictions on those who temporarily, should not have access to firearms, is a good idea. AND, is one that is
already in place. Judges ALL across this country, make it a point to inquire about firearms, when an arraignee has been charged with a crime that
would preclude gun ownership. Making this mandatory, would not be a bad idea.
you don't address the problem of outlets AFTER the baby has been electrocuted, you address it before hand. We can't wait until AFTER a criminal has
shot someone, we try to prevent him from being able to shoot someone with sensible laws
5) As for your next statement. I do not recall with the exception of prohibition, the Federal Govt. ever returning a priveledge, let alone a right
that had been stripped, without the SCOTUS getting involved. And, personally, I don't trust them with my rights, at all!
6) The people, are just fine with using their guns correctly. Unless you are OK with allowing a handful of members of a group, to define the entire
body...Which some might call, bigotry, or racism? Or some other term, that defines a very short sighted view of others.
If the people were just fine with using their guns correctly, there would be ZERO gun deaths, ZERO accidents, ZERO shootings. But there aren't.
People are not capable of using their guns correctly regardless of race, creed or gender.
7) Yes. Defenses against the wrong people getting guns, is important. But, there are already many, MANY defenses in place. The problem is, you can
write laws until your hand falls off, the bad guys DON'T CARE!
But now, the law-abiders, the ones that must deal with these restrictions, have been so hampered with laws that dont work, that they are suffering
immensely for it! And, possibly even a few are losing their own lives, because the restrictions kept, or prolonged THEM from securing the means to
protect themselves. And, more innocents will die. Is this acceptable?
People are not inherently evil. They make mistakes based on what they think is right or wrong and have reasons for doing so. It's not a matter of
"good guys and bad guys" there is a wide, wide range. It's not cut and dry or black and white, there are millions of shades of gray. Nobody is
trying to take away all guns from all people, they are trying to prevent the guns that are meant for one thing and one thing only, assault, from being
readily availble to anybody who may want one. There is no real use for them other than to kill people. They are no good for hunting, they are overkill
for personal protection, they only serve for mass killing in a military sense. The average person in the country has no use for them unless they are
planning to perform an illegal act either in the present or the future. Sure, if we have a zombie apocolypse, I'll regret taking them away, but
chances are, most of us won't survive it anyway. I'd like to live long enough for the zombies to take me out instead of a teenager or guy who lost
his job and is angry killing me in a mass shooting before the zombies ever get here.